Are 'Indiscreet' Images On Social Networks Really Having An Impact On Elections?

from the seems-blown-out-of-proportion dept

Back in 2006, we wondered what was going to happen when the generation that grew up with social networking started running for office. Would their youthful indiscretions — now shared with thousands of friends — come back to haunt them? Or would people just chalk them up to typical youthful indiscretions? I’m not quite sure we know the answer yet, but the NY Times has an article suggesting that we’re already seeing the impact, naming a few different campaigns where various images and videos of less-than-flattering activities became a campaign issue. But here’s the thing which the NY Times conveniently ignores: it appears that while some tried to make something out of these photos and videos, it’s difficult to find any indication that it had any impact at all. Some of the candidates in the article won, and some lost. Those that lost, it appears, were likely to lose anyway. If anything, perhaps the article should have made the point that the American voter is (oh my goodness!) smart enough not to care all that much about someone doing something silly that’s caught in a photograph.

Filed Under: , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Are 'Indiscreet' Images On Social Networks Really Having An Impact On Elections?”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment

“the American voter is (oh my goodness!) smart enough not to care all that much about someone doing something silly that’s caught in a photograph”

It appears to me that most elections are won through dishonest advertising and cheap shots against the opponents these days.

Perhaps it’s a cynical way to look at things, but I think most politicians would be more than happy to spin their opponents’ old facebook pics to tarnish their image.

The voters may normally be smart enough to realise that FB pics are silly and shouldn’t make a difference, but with enough brainwashing and a well-thought smear campaign, they could make a difference.


Re: Re:

The average voter doesn’t care because they blindly vote party lines. Partially because they bought into the belief that the party is the main thing (and sadly, they are right, parties control the politician, not the other way around), and partially because our current method of voting only allows for one of the two ‘main’ candidates to have a chance to win.

Derek Bredensteinersays:

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

I really meant the more general windfall of “those democrats really fucked up, let’s replace them with republicans” which exactly 2 years ago was “those republicans really fucked up, let’s replace them with democrats”. And the resulting large swaths of “democrats” or “republicans” that get elected due to that mentality.

But yes, absolutely you’re right, there were several exceptions and those should be talked about and celebrated.

Erin B.says:


Are you talking about Christine O’Donnell? I don’t know that the “prior quirks” in question were really “caught” — she was on a television show as a talking head. She signed up for it. It’s not like she rambled in the comments at a friend’s blog post. She was saying those things in a professional capacity; and anyway most of those quirky things haven’t been disavowed by her or her camp.

The only thing regarding O’Donnell’s race that was a “gotcha!” moment was the post on Gawker about her going home — but not having intercourse — with that one dude. And that came pretty late in a race wherein she’d already distinguished herself more as a nutter butter than a viable political candidate.

abc gumsays:

Re: Re:

“I don’t know that the “prior quirks” in question were really “caught” “

– look into it a bit further

“she was on a television show as a talking head”

– yeah, some time ago on Bill Maher’s show … which he then re-aired later, prior to the election.

“She was saying those things in a professional capacity”

– Oh, ok

“most of those quirky things haven’t been disavowed by her”

– I’m not a witch

“The only thing regarding O’Donnell’s race that was a “gotcha!” moment was the post on Gawker about her going home — but not having intercourse — with that one dude.”

– I guess there was no real impact on her campaign due to the videos of less-than-flattering statements.



“If they are told that they dislike a certain person with “politician x disgraced for previous indiscretions, polls expected to take a dip”, then people will follow like sheep.”

Also incorrect and easily shown by the outcome of the November midterms. If people simply voted the way the media told them the democrats would have been blown in to office with no effort.

Pickle Mongersays:

“[…] the American voter is (oh my goodness!) smart enough not to care all that much about someone doing something silly that’s caught in a photograph.”

Perhaps it’s the cynic in me but I’d venture that most voters would rather vote along the party lines and ignore the “indiscretions of youth” than to vote for the opposing and better-qualified candidate.

Free Capitalistsays:


What would be cool is if we could actually vote on the issues.

No, that would be bad. California’s proposition system has many great examples for why this is a bad idea. Voters have shown again and again that the vast majority of voters come to vote for one person, then “vote with their conscience” for everything else.

What this amounts to is voters making their decisions by the issue/proposition headline on the ballot itself. This is why California sees a succession of “Clean Water Bonds” pass, when there is never any obligation to use the debt incurred for any specific purpose.

More recently, in my district, voters passed an issue that allows their City Council to hold private decision making sessions. The ballot headline for that gem read “Bring Columbus Ordinance into Compliance with State Law”.

No, I have to disagree with Mike on this one. Voters may be smart, but they practice voting stupidly. Real stupid.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop ┬╗

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Older Stuff
13:40 It's Great That Winnie The Pooh Is In The Public Domain; But He Should Have Been Free In 1982 (Or Earlier) (35)
12:06 Norton 360 Now Comes With Crypto Mining Capabilities And Sketchy Removal Process (28)
10:45 Chinese Government Dragnet Now Folding In American Social Media Platforms To Silence Dissent (14)
10:40 Daily Deal: The 2022 Ultimate Cybersecurity Analyst Preparation Bundle (0)
09:29 A Fight Between Facebook And The British Medical Journal Highlights The Difficulty Of Moderating 'Medical Misinformation' (9)
06:29 Court Ruling Paves The Way For Better, More Reliable Wi-Fi (4)
20:12 Eighth Circuit (Again) Says There's Nothing Wrong With Detaining Innocent Minors At Gunpoint (15)
15:48 China's Regulatory War On Its Gaming Industry Racks Up 14k Casualties (10)
13:31 Chinese Government Fines Local Car Dealerships For Surveilling While Not Being The Government (5)
12:08 Eric Clapton Pretends To Regret The Decision To Sue Random German Woman Who Listed A Bootleg Of One Of His CDs On Ebay (29)
10:44 ICE Is So Toxic That The DHS's Investigative Wing Is Asking To Be Completely Separated From It (29)
10:39 Daily Deal: The 2022 Complete Raspberry Pi And Arduino Developer Bundle (0)
09:31 Google Blocked An Article About Police From The Intercept... Because The Title Included A Phrase That Was Also A Movie Title (24)
06:22 Wireless Carriers Balk At FAA Demand For 5G Deployment Delays Amid Shaky Safety Concerns (16)
19:53 Tenth Circuit Denies Qualified Immunity To Social Worker Who Fabricated A Mother's Confession Of Child Abuse (35)
15:39 Sci-Hub's Creator Thinks Academic Publishers, Not Her Site, Are The Real Threat To Science, And Says: 'Any Law Against Knowledge Is Fundamentally Unjust' (34)
13:32 Federal Court Tells Proud Boys Defendants That Raiding The Capitol Building Isn't Covered By The First Amendment (25)
12:14 US Courts Realizing They Have A Judge Alan Albright Sized Problem In Waco (17)
10:44 Boston Police Department Used Forfeiture Funds To Hide Purchase Of Surveillance Tech From City Reps (16)
10:39 Daily Deal: The Ultimate Microsoft Excel Training Bundle (0)
09:20 NY Senator Proposes Ridiculously Unconstitutional Social Media Law That Is The Mirror Opposite Of Equally Unconstitutional Laws In Florida & Texas (25)
06:12 Telecom Monopolies Are Exploiting Crappy U.S. Broadband Maps To Block Community Broadband Grant Requests (7)
12:00 Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of 2021 At Techdirt (17)
10:00 Gaming Like It's 1926: Join The Fourth Annual Public Domain Game Jam (6)
09:00 New Year's Message: The Arc Of The Moral Universe Is A Twisty Path (33)
19:39 DHS, ICE Begin Body Camera Pilot Program With Surprisingly Good Policies In Place (7)
15:29 Remembering Techdirt Contributors Sherwin And Elliot (1)
13:32 DC Metro PD's Powerful Review Panel Keeps Giving Bad Cops Their Jobs Back (6)
12:11 Missouri Governor Still Expects Journalists To Be Prosecuted For Showing How His Admin Leaked Teacher Social Security Numbers (39)
10:48 Oversight Board Overturning Instagram Takedown Of Ayahuasca Post Demonstrates The Impossibility Of Content Moderation (10)
More arrow
This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it